Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Prominent Accountants Blast Apple's $1.99 802.11n Upgrade Reasoning
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No kidding! I paid for @#$% 802.11n when I bought the damn computer. I shouldn't have to told one day "oh, by the way, that price tag you paid? That was only for part of the computer. To get the other half, we charge a fee...". It's not the $1.99. That's pocket change. It's the fact that Apple lied that a computer didn't have a certain feature when it actually did all along. Being asked to pay for it is ridiculous!
In the end it doesn't matter I guess, someone's gonna make a hack that enables it anyway.
You did pay for the hardware but you DID NOT pay for the firmware.
As other have said here Apple is protecting themselves from any legal action by charging for the firmware to run "N". That's fine by be as I really don't need the share price of my stock to go down because of some fool taking legal action because Apple had to restate earnings or Apple being required to waste money restating earnings.
So stop you crying!
As other have said here Apple is protecting themselves from any legal action by charging for the firmware to run "N". That's fine by be as I really don't need the share price of my stock to go down because of some fool taking legal action because Apple had to restate earnings or Apple being required to waste money restating earnings.
So stop you crying!
These general accountants aren't the ones under the microscope and the ones who will be blasted if the SEC or whoever finds a reason to decide to investigate this. Apple is taking enough heat already, I would say its in the best interest of AAPL to play it safe. The last thing we need is someone coming after Apple about this since we already know how popular it is to go after them.
And if you really can't afford it, go halfsies with a friend, or eight friends, or millions of friends on LimeWire. I doubt this will require activation or confirmation of your Genuine OS X. In fact, if you sadly are in poverty of third world proportions to the point where you can't spend two dollars on something you really don't even need, buy an AirPort Base Station, install the software, then take it back. Obviously Apple will understand if such a large base of its customers are that poor.
And shame on the people who are all upset at Apple for its explanation. They don't owe us an explanation at all, and then they try and everyone gets mad.
You're basically getting your "n" for free, when you (say it with me) DID NOT PAY FOR 802.11n FUNCTIONALITY.
And if you really can't afford it, go halfsies with a friend, or eight friends, or millions of friends on LimeWire. I doubt this will require activation or confirmation of your Genuine OS X. In fact, if you sadly are in poverty of third world proportions to the point where you can't spend two dollars on something you really don't even need, buy an AirPort Base Station, install the software, then take it back. Obviously Apple will understand if such a large base of its customers are that poor.
And shame on the people who are all upset at Apple for its explanation. They don't owe us an explanation at all, and then they try and everyone gets mad.
You're basically getting your "n" for free, when you (say it with me) DID NOT PAY FOR 802.11n FUNCTIONALITY.
For a change someone ask a really good question.
I thing not yet as they have not yet update the specification on the web site.
Communications
Built-in 54-Mbps AirPort Extreme Card (802.11g standard) (3)
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR (Enhanced Data Rate) module (1)
Built-in 10/100/1000 BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet (RJ-45 connector)
Works with 56K V.92 Apple USB Modem (sold separately)
Once they do then the answer would be yet. I don't think they will change the specifications until "N" is signed off by the standards board.
I thing not yet as they have not yet update the specification on the web site.
Communications
Built-in 54-Mbps AirPort Extreme Card (802.11g standard) (3)
Built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR (Enhanced Data Rate) module (1)
Built-in 10/100/1000 BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet (RJ-45 connector)
Works with 56K V.92 Apple USB Modem (sold separately)
Once they do then the answer would be yet. I don't think they will change the specifications until "N" is signed off by the standards board.
That's a good point. Now that they've announced that Macs have the "n" spec, they shouldn't be charging. And if they are still, then they should be required to have in big bold letters ($1.99 fee to use "n")
Get real? The only reality here my friend is that Apple lied and sold us a computer with different specs than were shown. You don't sell a car and tell people it has 300hp only to tell the person as they're signing for it that it actually has 340hp, but the extra 40hp is gonna cost ya...
And now that this is in the open there is no reason at all for Apple to charge for "n" on any new Macs. We all know it has "n", so they need to stop lying and saying it doesn't.
Really? did you not know that pretty much every car on the road is limited to a top speed? Take the bugger to a garage and make a few adjustments and you can squeeze more out of it. Add a new air filter and get an extra 20bhp etc etc
Cars are limited in so many ways. Apple has given you a gift on a plate. You bought it thinking it was .g and for a measly $2 you can have the future .n.
If i was Apple and reading this i would think you know what **** them all we won't release the $2 unlock and if they care that much we will take their lappys and machines in free of charge and put a .g card in for them. You would rather apple took your machine in for free and did that for you?
EDIT: You would have moaned had it had a .g card in and then .n was released and you had to buy a new card and have it fitted! I can't understand people who can't see they are actually lucky apple thought a head for you!
I don't care what was or wasn't paid for. What I do care is it appears Apple lied - or at least that is what the accountants are saying, even if not directly, let's call a spade a spade.
IF that is the case, yes, I am pissed. If Apple has just taken a conservative route based on all the stock options, re-stating earnings companies have been doing in wake of corporate scandals than fine.
I only see four options for this excuse:
1. The WSJ accountants are wrong, and Apple was right.
2. Apple took advice from it's accountants and they were wrong (meaning someone should be fired).
3. Apple wasn't clear (and their accounting dept) on the rules and played it safe (most likely someone should be reprimanded at least if not fired given how it makes Apple look incompetent)
4. Apple out and out lied.
That leaves me 1 out of 4 reasons to trust Apple. Not great odds. Apple doesn't come out looking rosy on this regardless of the price or what it is for.
It's very common for hardware to have features that are never turn on by the manufacture. That does not mean that they lied about the specifications. If the manufacture wants to turn on the feature at a later date they have the right to charge for it.
As for charging current shipments, yes there is until the "N" specification is signed off, which should happen soon, and Apple changes the published specifications. If someone is worried about the $1.99 then wait until it's released.
What can I say other than PEBCAC.
As for charging current shipments, yes there is until the "N" specification is signed off, which should happen soon, and Apple changes the published specifications. If someone is worried about the $1.99 then wait until it's released.
What can I say other than PEBCAC.
What I find really funny about this is that Apple has not officially announced anything. Until there is an official announcement on the Apple website or they actually make this available in the Apple Store isn't all of this just speculation and rumor. Kind of like the Octo Core Mac and the G5 Powerbook.
And here we are with yet another thread about this. Talk about a slow news day. This should be a 2nd page thread at most.
Let's think about this for a second. The rumor is that Apple may or may not offer a patch to add support for 802.11n to their latest Airport Extreme Cards and they may or may not charge between $1.99 and $4.99 for such a patch.
And here we are with yet another thread about this. Talk about a slow news day. This should be a 2nd page thread at most.
Let's think about this for a second. The rumor is that Apple may or may not offer a patch to add support for 802.11n to their latest Airport Extreme Cards and they may or may not charge between $1.99 and $4.99 for such a patch.
Given that Apple is asking only $2 for 'n' functionality, I think the hypothetical would be more like $5 for 3G.
Still, even at $50, I know several people that would jump at the opportunity, and many many others who just wouldn't care (use what they bought).
President Clinton unscrambled GPS making it 10X more accurate and at no charge!
President Clinton allowed GPS hardware to "automagically" be 10 times more capable (wow! imagine that sort of upgrade) -- and at no charge to consumers! This didn't require new hardware, nor soft- or firmware upgrades in this case. Once again, it didn't cost anything which is pretty amazing when you figure the federal government is involved...
WIRED magazine, "Clinton Unscrambles GPS Signals", May, 01, 2000
[Excerpted]
President Clinton on Monday gave the go-ahead for letting boaters, motorists, and hikers use a satellite-navigation system with the same pinpoint accuracy as the military has long enjoyed.
Clinton ordered that at 8 p.m., EDT on Monday night, the U.S. military stop intentionally scrambling the satellite signals used by civilians to improve the accuracy of Global Position System receivers tenfold.
Consumers who have bought GPS receivers for boats, cars, or recreation will find that they are 10 times more accurate when the military ceases disruption of the signal beamed down from orbiting GPS satellites. The White House said it should generate greater acceptance of the system.
President Clinton allowed GPS hardware to "automagically" be 10 times more capable (wow! imagine that sort of upgrade) -- and at no charge to consumers! This didn't require new hardware, nor soft- or firmware upgrades in this case. Once again, it didn't cost anything which is pretty amazing when you figure the federal government is involved...
WIRED magazine, "Clinton Unscrambles GPS Signals", May, 01, 2000
[Excerpted]
President Clinton on Monday gave the go-ahead for letting boaters, motorists, and hikers use a satellite-navigation system with the same pinpoint accuracy as the military has long enjoyed.
Clinton ordered that at 8 p.m., EDT on Monday night, the U.S. military stop intentionally scrambling the satellite signals used by civilians to improve the accuracy of Global Position System receivers tenfold.
Consumers who have bought GPS receivers for boats, cars, or recreation will find that they are 10 times more accurate when the military ceases disruption of the signal beamed down from orbiting GPS satellites. The White House said it should generate greater acceptance of the system.
Well the whole thing doesn't really make sense. It's not the $2, it's that the story doesn't make sense.
On the one hand, they're saying that SOX is telling them that the computers might be considered "not complete" as shipped, with this new firmware upgrade to the wireless card, and then consequently they would have to restate earnings.
On the other hand, they're now saying that they're going to sell the firmware upgrade as a paid upgrade costing $1.99.
Well they can't have it both ways. Either the upgrade "completes the computer as shipped" or it doesn't. One or the other. Regardless of whether people are paying for the upgrade. Just making people pay for the upgrade doesn't make the upgrade a separate purchase, if the computer wasn't considered complete at the time of shipment.
Looking at it from the opposite direction, if the computers were considered complete at the time of shipment, and the upgrade is considered a separate upgrade purchase, then Apple shouldn't have to charge for it or restate earnings, if they give it away for free, because the computer was complete at the time of shipment. So, sorry SOX, but you can't have it both ways.
On the one hand, they're saying that SOX is telling them that the computers might be considered "not complete" as shipped, with this new firmware upgrade to the wireless card, and then consequently they would have to restate earnings.
On the other hand, they're now saying that they're going to sell the firmware upgrade as a paid upgrade costing $1.99.
Well they can't have it both ways. Either the upgrade "completes the computer as shipped" or it doesn't. One or the other. Regardless of whether people are paying for the upgrade. Just making people pay for the upgrade doesn't make the upgrade a separate purchase, if the computer wasn't considered complete at the time of shipment.
Looking at it from the opposite direction, if the computers were considered complete at the time of shipment, and the upgrade is considered a separate upgrade purchase, then Apple shouldn't have to charge for it or restate earnings, if they give it away for free, because the computer was complete at the time of shipment. So, sorry SOX, but you can't have it both ways.
True, but personally, IMO, its the principle. Apple shouldn't charge users for the drivers for the hardware they already have, especially when others suggest that Apple's logic is at fault.
That's the best one I've heard all day. Ever heard of the PCAOB?
http://www.pcaobus.org
Play it safe from what? How is charging a fee playing it safe? GAAP could care less about how much or if you charge a fee at all. That is up to Apple to work out with its customers. GAAP simply requires it to be accounted for properly. "Revenue Recognition" DOES NOT EQUAL "Fees Charged".
Play it safe? They don't have to charge a dime as long as they account for it correctly. It was Apple's decision to charge a fee. There are no rules or laws requiring a fee, just proper accounting.
But isn't the whole reason they have to due to accounting reasons? Whether it 1 cent or 1 million dollars....
WOW! So you are EXACTLY the reason they are charging! You think that n was implied when you bought it. SO THE ACCOUNTING RULES WOULD FORCE THEM TO DEFER ALL REVENUE UNTIL THIS WAS DELIVERED.
Welcome to the world according to GAAPWhat you guys don't understand is that Apple has essentially passed the buck off on the accountants and their profession. So of course they aren't too happy. Remember, it is the auditors who get sued first. Ask the partners of Arthur Andersen. Oh what, they don't exist anymore after Enron.
This is so simple.
1) Apple was faced with a threat of a restatement.
2) They did not want to restate for obvious reasons.
3) They find a loop-hole by charging.
4) They don't want their customers to view them as the bad guys.
5) They take the calculated risk that their fanbase knows nothing about the accounting profession and will pretty much stand behind them no matter what.
6) They blame the accountants. They don't use Macs anyway. A lot of accountants would have appreciated Apple's attempts if they weren't getting lied about. Call it what you like, but Apple has not clarified their statement.
That's it. Actually, I think that this will backfire on Apple, as the SEC will now look at them more closely to try and make Apple look bad to the rest of the ~90% computer users.
Hey. I take offense
I'm an accountant and use 2 macs
My bad, that was a generalization. I used to be an auditor myself. I use mac. But resent how naive Apple thinks I am.
I am happy to pay for the update though.